The measurement problem is the question of why, or even if, collapse
occurs. Certainly no coherent concept of how and why collapse occurs has
been formulated in a manner which meets with general acceptance. It
appears, as Davies and others explain, the appearance of collapse is
purely subjective, as Everett demonstrates. In this case, consciousness
is necessarily central, as it is consciousness, and only consciousness,
which encounters this appearance of collapse and change. We know there
is an effective collapse, or the appearance of collapse, because we
experience this subjectively. On the other hand, nothing in the physical
world, including the physical body and the physical brain, can account
for this. Whatever consciousness is, it appears to be the phenomenon at
the centre of this process. In consciousness, change is encountered, the
appearance of collapse, and, it increasingly appears, no where else. My
paper Logical Types in Quantum Mechanics
<http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00005554/> explains this in detail.
On 04/03/11 16:31, 1Z wrote:
On Mar 4, 2:20 pm, Andrew Soltau<andrewsol...@gmail.com> wrote:
I suspect we all may.
Wong states that, important as a grand unified theory might be, "... it
is lacking in one important fundamental aspect, viz., the role of
consciousness [which] could in fact be considered the most fundamental
aspect of physics."
How does he know consciousness is fundamental?
Given that conciousness seems all too clearly to be centrally involved
in quantum mechanics,
That isn't clear at all
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at